John Houbolt's Passing Has Lessons for All Engineers

But where Houbolt really stands out is that he went over the heads of his bosses and wrote a letter directly to the Apollo project head, Robert Seamens (six org-chart layers above him), thus circumventing channels. He said he was absolutely convinced that the planned approach was a dead end, his alternative was viable, and he could make a case for it. He was not being a team player, that's for sure.

This story isn't based on hearsay or rumor; it is fully documented, the letter exists, and is supported by interviews with many of the NASA staff. (An excellent book on the Apollo program, the people who made it happen, the issues they faced, and the way they overcame countless technical and organizational problems is Apollo: The Race to the Moon by Charles Murray and Catherine Bly Cox.)

Long story short: Eventually, the challenges of implementing the planned "conventional" approach just became overwhelming. As the design approach got firmer, the numbers just wouldn’t add up for success, while the risk of backing down to the moon's surface and then blasting off started to look as high as, or higher than, the "crazy" lunar-orbit approach. NASA's thinking shifted steadily to Houbolt's "out of the box" idea. See the flight plan, below.

A detail of Houbolt's mission plan to the moon. Click here for a larger image.

Once his idea was accepted as the only possible way to proceed and succeed, all the underlying engineering assumptions and constraints changed dramatically as well. Designing a lander that had to operate only in the low-g environment of the moon, and which would be discarded when done with its mission, redefined the basics of the problem. The lander became a lightweight, non-aerodynamic, awkward-looking vehicle that would be otherwise considered too flimsy to survive Earth's gravity and stress.

Not only did Houbolt act as a loner to pursue a radically innovative idea and back it up with numbers (to the modest extent possible), but he risked his professional career by pushing it and being a pain within his organization about it. While we now take Earth-orbit rendezvous as routine, and even treat rendezvous around the moon and Mars as "no big deal," it took real courage and guts to suggest it as a solution in the early days of the Apollo program. Then to have to fight within your organization to have them, at least, listen: That's a tough battle.

So here’s to the memory of John Houbolt, who braved conventional wisdom and not only lived (organizationally) to tell about it despite personal derision, but also saw his "weird" ideas and promotion of them come to reality as the only feasible solution.

You don't see much of that courage anytime, anywhere. And I wonder: Do we really now have less of it?

My father worked for a compan ycalled Jan Hardware in the 1960s. His company made the large knobs all over the LEM instrument panels. They had a slip-clutch mechanism so the know would keep turning when it reached the end of its travel. It solved the problem of when astronauts would strip the knob's inside whiel wearing heavy gloves.

Along with congrats for his mind and bravery and condolences for John Houbolt's passing, we can take away some engineering thoughts, too.

A big problem is a lot of little problems.

Each solution has its own needs and its dunnage - e.g. photos need to be as clear as possible, but they don't need colloidal plates and wet baths, or developing fluids, or sheet film or wires or even lenses.

Don't own more of a solution than you need to.

Use the engine, burn the crates, eat the freight horses.

The lander module only had to support itself and the recovery module for One Landing! Look at how much simpler both up- and down stream tasks become.

There are worse things than getting fired, if that's the big fear here, Martin. John Houbolt was a public servant doing his job. Maybe not doing your job is worst than getting fired. It depends on your personal integrity and what you are willing to live with.

I'd say it depends on the boss. Those that have confidence in themselves will help you push ideas they think will work up the chain, even carry it for you. The insecure ones will eather shoort your ideas down because they see you as a threat of will claim the idea as thier own. It's called politics.

You can try going over your bosses head or even pushing your idea in a public forum having your idea critisized by your boss as not preferred. That is a short road to the end of your job these days. It does not matter if you are right.

Of course, it helps if there is a ladder or org chart in the first place--too many companies are in such constant internal turmoil/churn that you can't figure out who the level above actually is, iwth job titles/functions that obscure rather than define--it's especially the case for the one(s) above the one right above you.